↓ Skip to main content

Alpine ethnobotany in Italy: traditional knowledge of gastronomic and medicinal plants among the Occitans of the upper Varaita valley, Piedmont

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Alpine ethnobotany in Italy: traditional knowledge of gastronomic and medicinal plants among the Occitans of the upper Varaita valley, Piedmont
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, November 2009
DOI 10.1186/1746-4269-5-32
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Pieroni, Maria Elena Giusti

Abstract

A gastronomic and medical ethnobotanical study was conducted among the Occitan communities living in Blins/Bellino and Chianale, in the upper Val Varaita, in the Piedmontese Alps, North-Western Italy, and the traditional uses of 88 botanical taxa were recorded. Comparisons with and analysis of other ethnobotanical studies previously carried out in other Piemontese and surrounding areas, show that approximately one fourth of the botanical taxa quoted in this survey are also known in other surrounding Occitan valleys. It is also evident that traditional knowledge in the Varaita valley has been heavily eroded. This study also examined the local legal framework for the gathering of botanical taxa, and the potential utilization of the most quoted medicinal and food wild herbs in the local market, and suggests that the continuing widespread local collection from the wild of the aerial parts of Alpine wormwood for preparing liquors (Artemisia genipi, A. glacialis, and A. umbelliformis) should be seriously reconsidered in terms of sustainability, given the limited availability of these species, even though their collection is culturally salient in the entire study area.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 2%
Japan 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 79 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 24%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Master 10 12%
Other 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 29%
Environmental Science 10 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Chemistry 4 5%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 21 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 January 2012.
All research outputs
#1,143,083
of 9,538,011 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#60
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,674
of 125,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,538,011 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 125,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.